Alternatives Analysis for SR-710 project

SR-710 Alternatives Analysis by

Above is the Alternatives Analysis for the SR-710 project that was released late Friday afternoon. Here’s the executive summary.

We’ve previously reported on the five alternatives that Metro staff is recommending for further study in a draft environmental impact statement/report, but the AA provides a lot of detail on the wide variety of options considered and why these five made the cut.

The five alternatives: no build, transportation system improvements (i.e. traffic signal and street improvements), a bus rapid transit line from East Los Angeles to Pasadena, light rail alternatives from East Los Angeles to Pasadena and a freeway tunnel directly connecting the two ends of the 710 freeway in Pasadena and Alhambra.

Maps of the alternatives recommended are posted after the jump. Click here for the project’s home page. There are also three community meetings scheduled beginning at 6 p.m. on Wednesday, Jan. 23, in Pasadena — click here for time and dates.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

Click above to see larger.

4 thoughts on “Alternatives Analysis for SR-710 project

  1. it doesnt seem like the freeway option is very popular among the people in the area. If its not a freeway then I hope its a lightrail line preferably to CSULA as it will help a lot of students in the area get to school and get all of those kids off the road.

  2. Pingback: Today’s Headlines | Streetsblog Los Angeles

  3. Not all BRT is the same. If it is just a brightly painted bus running through the same mixed traffic with autos, then it ain’t real BRT.

    BRT is moving towards being designated as “Gold BRT”, “Silver BRT” and “Bronze BRT”

    http://www.itdp.org/documents/BRT_English_REVISED2_FINAL_LR.pdf

    When Metro suggests BRT as an alternative, it should state what level of BRT it is actually proposing. Don’t assume Curtiba type infrastructure (and Curtiba is building rail now as BRT isn’t enough).

    If a bus is running in the same lanes as autos, it ain’t BRT.

  4. At the meeting this Saturday at Cal State L.A. there will be:

    “Validated parking will be available at the top level of Parking Structure C, north of the Eagle Building Ballroom.”

    Will there also be validated (refunded) transit fares?

Comments are closed.